As a general comment, I'm a little disappointed. Apart from the Soviet units, new campaigns, fonts and graphics, most of what is new appears to have been adopted from various mods (eg smoke, skirmish etc). Still, it is very early days and perhaps there is more to come.

Here is my initial feedback / wish list:

The Soviet infantry colours blend in with some backgrounds - can this be changed.
Please put the combat factors back on the units - it is frustrating having to check the new Soviet units.
The start / end turn button appears to be huge and overwhelm the screen - can the size be reduced.
Noticed that tanks can drive through some traps on the RHS of the map in the Leningrad scenario.
I'm sure a Russian unit spoke German in one scenario, but did not keep track (Spies??).
Can you translate what the Russians say please !
Some Russian trucks have a half track sound.
For the skirmish selections, very few T34's can be purchased in the games I have selected - not sure why.

As a general comment, I'm a little disappointed. Apart from the Soviet units, new campaigns, fonts and graphics, most of what is new appears to have been adopted from various mods (eg smoke, skirmish etc). Still, it is very early days and perhaps there is more to come.

Here is my initial feedback / wish list:

The Soviet infantry colours blend in with some backgrounds - can this be changed.
Please put the combat factors back on the units - it is frustrating having to check the new Soviet units.
The start / end turn button appears to be huge and overwhelm the screen - can the size be reduced.
Noticed that tanks can drive through some traps on the RHS of the map in the Leningrad scenario.
I'm sure a Russian unit spoke German in one scenario, but did not keep track (Spies??).
Can you translate what the Russians say please !
Some Russian trucks have a half track sound.
For the skirmish selections, very few T34's can be purchased in the games I have selected - not sure why.

Cheers

Rob

For the tank traps it seems to me that if you bombard them then you can go though them. Maybe there will be different types of traps, some that can be destroyed and others that can't.

It is correct that the tank traps can be destroyed by bombardment. As with the barbed wire, we are still working on the visuals for the destroyed tank traps, you currently need to check the tool tip to see when it changes.

It looks like the Russian AA halftrack is set to play the wrong voices, that will definitely be fixed for the next version.

My wish list so far:
1) auto save per turn (can be turned on/off by user)
2) auto screenshot feature (snaps the whole map each turn, once at turn start and once at turn end - can be turned on/off by user)
3) instead of the words NEW SAVE can we just have a blinking cursor
4) in skirmish mode, attack type, allow the player to redeploy his forces before game start
5) after game ends I'd like to be able to survey the map after the 'objective complete' message and before the losses screen

Some of the things that I would like to see (and forgive me if they are already in):

. a turn option for infantry (in suitable terrain) of "digging in" which would use all their AP for a turn while increasing their defence by some reasonable factor - 25% for example.
. a turn option for armour, artillery and infantry of "camouflage" which would use all the AP for a turn and change their icon to bushes (say). This would not change any of the terrain's defence factors or lack of them but only the enemy's ability to spot the unit. Camouflaged units would be visible (as units) by scouts from two squares away and by other infantry units from one square away.
. finite ammunition and fuel with a resupply action requiring significant AP exenditure. There could also be supply units on the battlefield with the function of taking ammunition, food and fuel around to combat units - probably a bit too much but it would mean combat units would have to stay within contact of the supply lines or at least get back to their lines eventually.
. line of sight for both spotting and reacting to reflect "facing".
. the medic function could be more complex - dead troops should remain dead, seriously wounded could be made slightly wounded and slightly wounded could be put back into the battle, for example. There could also be Medic units on the battlefield working their magic with the injured.
. the source of artillery and mortar fire should be betrayed by smoke traces to those enemy units within sight.
. armour should be able to drive through small streams/rivers with perhaps a random possible breakdown factor depending on the type of unit or the experience of the unit.
. armour should be "allowed" to enter unsuitable terrain and get stuck, perhaps, permanently - bogs, lakes, ravines could be natural tank traps if the infantry do not recce the area first. A vehicle which drives blind into unknown terrain should risk disaster.

"finite ammunition and fuel with a resupply action requiring significant AP exenditure." Given the duration of a typical game (1 day) I don't think I'd like to be bothered with ammo resupply. BA/BA2 are rather abstracted games meant capture the flavor of battle without bogging down in too much detail.

"Given the duration of a typical game (1 day) I don't think I'd like to be bothered with ammo resupply. BA/BA2 are rather abstracted games meant capture the flavor of battle without bogging down in too much detail."

Quite a lot to argue about in that statement. However, I think BA is a great game and I am sure BA2 will be even better. I think part of the "flavor", of skirmishes particularly, is the need for hard pressed infantry to not run out of ammunition. It is just as much a part of the flavor as whether to fire from four squares away or two squares away; whether to send units forward in pairs or alone; whether to keep in contact with other units or to go off behind the lines without any fear of being cut off from base. BA2 as it is already set up allows for several "hours" of combat - changing from daylight to dusk to night to dawn etc - so it seems reasonable that troops morale and performance should be affected by ammo or food shortages. In the (hopefully) full blown scenarios in the BA2 game where the battles will take place over several "days" ammo and food resupply seem more relevant. As for playability the functions could perhaps be turned off by those who cannot be bothered with that particular flavor.

Ditto the idea of medic units: if the fighting is so fierce that the medics cannot get to the wounded without becoming casualties themselves then surely the wounded must go untreated. In BA at the moment a unit can be restored to strength and even fighting morale simply by clicking on side buttons which takes no account of the battlefield conditions and "real world" likelihood of such miracles.

[quote="Tac2i"]"finite ammunition and fuel with a resupply action requiring significant AP exenditure." Given the duration of a typical game (1 day) I don't think I'd like to be bothered with ammo resupply.

[b]BA/BA2 are rather abstracted games meant capture the flavor of battle without bogging down in too much detail.[/quote][/b]

i support this view wholeheartedly - no arguments from me.

What separates BA from many other tactical games is the elegant way it distills out the important elements of small unit combat.

Anyone can invent a complicated set of wargame rules (I've done it many times).

Inventing a simple (not simplistic) set of rules that rewards correct historical tactics is not so easy.

Of course you are entitled to your view. I agree also that simplicity is best and, just to be clear, I am not trying to invent anything. No axe to grind here. You are much more experienced than I and therefore your opinion carries more weight than mine. However, I would still argue that considerations of supply and support are basic parts of "correct historical tactics".

I would also argue that from the programming point of view the addition of medic and supply units would be relatively simple. Plus, as I say, if these units are optional then the players can choose to keep the game simplistic or simple as they wish.

affamail
My reply wasn't intended to oppose your views, (which carry just as much weight as any ones) but to support the reply by Tac2i in respect of the inclusion of ammo and re-supply rules.

We can happily disagree about the usefulness of having to keep track of supply and whether acting as the QMS, ordnance officer and logistics officer as well as the platoon commander, adds interest to the game.

Ditto. All views and discussion welcome. I used to play a game titled Sudden Strike (14 years ago) which was somewhat similar to Battle Academy. It was a real time tactical game that had resupply. Me and my buddies had a lot of fun playing it.

Arminius wrote:affamail
My reply wasn't intended to oppose your views, (which carry just as much weight as any ones) but to support the reply by Tac2i in respect of the inclusion of ammo and re-supply rules.

We can happily disagree about the usefulness of having to keep track of supply and whether acting as the QMS, ordnance officer and logistics officer as well as the platoon commander, adds interest to the game.

Yes, exactly. It is what happens in Panzer Corps. Again it is optional at game start, and, if chosen, applies to both sides.

It does have the draw back that it is easy to get paranoid - "what happened to my tank?" etc. However, I like it because: there is no issue of unit visibility (as mentioned by me and commented on by you elsewhere) and, although the replay can be entertaining it does take time and is quite often tedious.